[MD] The Quality/MOQ meta-metaphysics

[Ian Glendinning]

Thanks Arlo,

I can find plenty of quotes that support the general argument that
Pirsig was improving on rational intellect, helping it to evolve
rather than condemn it. No argument. What I can't find is any specific
quote responding to Bo's SOLAQI the specific way you suggest ...
though I too, imagine he would.

What people say, mean, do, mean to say, mean to do, say they mean or
say they do are at least seven different things, before anyone brings
imperfections like ignorance into it.

Ian

On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 3:18 PM, ARLO J BENSINGER JR <ajb102 at psu.edu> wrote:
> [Ian]
> Arlo, you attempted to say that Pirsig himself rejects Bo's SOLAQI
> interpretation. You actually quoted (in quotes) Pirsig saying that it
> "undermines the MoQ" ... could you provide that reference (again). Humour me.
>
> [Arlo]
> I'm actually out of town at the moment, on someone else's computer, so my
> e-copies of stuff and my email archives are unavailable to me today (will be
> back tomorrow). If its urgent, I am sure Horse or someone else can provide the
> full quote.
>
> But its not just that quote. From many passages in ZMM it is clear his intent
> is not to "condemn" rationality, but to expand it. Since ZMM is on the web, I
> can provide one of these.
>
> "Newton invented a new form of reason. He expanded reason to handle
> infinitesimal changes and I think what is needed now is a similar expansion of
> reason to handle technological ugliness." (ZMM)
>
> Also, from the Paul Turner letter (since I can get that off the web too)...
>
> ""Intellect" can then be defined very loosely as the level of independently
> manipulable signs. Grammar, logic and mathematics can be described as the rules
> of this sign manipulation... it seems to me the greatest meaning can be given
> to the intellectual level if it is confined to the skilled manipulation of
> abstract symbols that have no corresponding particular experience and which
> behave according to rules of their own." (Pirsig)
>
> Now, Bo has every valid and legitimate opportunity to disagree and find error
> or fault in what Pirsig has said. Disagreement is not the issue. The issue is
> in saying that, despite all this, Pirsig was just too ignorant to know what he
> himself must've meant.
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>